Help me plan my logic stage logic scope and sequence?

I need to plan now for purchasing my oldest boy's logic curriculum. He is on the young side of his grade, so I don't want to do anything too hard before he's ready for it. I was thinking of this scope and sequence:

What do you think? I can switch 7th grade with 8th, if Watts would be harder than MP's Logic. Watts doesn't get into formal logic. It's more practical logic, if I can call it that, so I'm not sure whether it would be best at the end of a formal logic study, perhaps in high school, or before, as I have it here.

What about CAP's The Art of Argument--is that a better choice than some of these?

And how do I teach Bluedorn's materials and Watts'? Do I just sit down and read a chapter a week with my child and discuss? Are there any workbooks that help with practice identifying fallacies for the Bluedorn's materials? Is there a discussion guide or any sorts of assignments?

My oldest and I used Fallacy Detective this year in 7th. He could have easily done it earlier, but I didn't own it earlier. He read a chapter each week on his own, we discussed it together. At the end of each chapter, scenarios are given and you decide which fallacy, if any.

Rather than attempting to map out a logic path for the next several years, I suggest purchasing Fallacy Detective to see if your son is ready.

Have you looked at Intro and Intermed Logic by Jim Nance? I would highly recommend them as Jim actually teaches the students how to build a logical argument from the ground up. It is symbolic logic vs. linguistic (Traditional Logic). Roman Roads Media offers it with updated TM's and SM's and DVD's of Jim walking you through it- it's also offered on-line- excellent foundation in logic!

I'm not familiar with some of those, but what struck me is how drawn out the process is. We would probably fizzle before getting to the end.

Mine add some of the logic puzzles TWTM suggests around 5th grade. Then we do Art of Argument around 6th-7th, Argument Builder after that, and then Discovery of Deduction for some of them. Then they're done and ready to move onto rhetoric. We did put the Argument Rule book into our composition block at one point, and I'll likely do that again. (For that matter my 6th and 7th last year used AoA in their composition block. We ran through it primarily orally at a fast clip and turned some of the exercise questions into larger writing projects.)

The Classical Academic Press books are all one semester books if done at full speed. If you're concerned about a younger DC handling them just slow it down and stretch it out to last a year.

FWIW Traditional Logic flopped in this house. If you're already familiar with MP's style and it works well for you, you will probably be fine with it. MP does not work for this family and we're used to more engaging curricula; we found TL as dry as chalkdust and didn't make it halfway through before shelving it.

Have you looked at Intro and Intermed Logic by Jim Nance? I would highly recommend them as Jim actually teaches the students how to build a logical argument from the ground up. It is symbolic logic vs. linguistic (Traditional Logic). Roman Roads Media offers it with updated TM's and SM's and DVD's of Jim walking you through it- it's also offered on-line- excellent foundation in logic!

Ooh, thank you. I forgot I bought a cheap used version of either the TM or SM of Intro and have never looked at it. I do remember that mine has Wilsons name on the cover too. I already own Fallacy Detective, Thinking Toolbox, and Intro Logic (though I would have to purchase other things for it), as well as Watts' books. I also have a logic book by, I think it's Geisler? I was wondering if I should just use what I already own, or if any of them covered formal logic (that's why I was thinking of TL1-2.) I thought all of these would take a year or so. But I'm willing to purchase from MP or Romans Road or CAP if those would work better. I've never used anything from any of those companies except for CAP Fable.

Have you looked at Intro and Intermed Logic by Jim Nance? I would highly recommend them as Jim actually teaches the students how to build a logical argument from the ground up. It is symbolic logic vs. linguistic (Traditional Logic). Roman Roads Media offers it with updated TM's and SM's and DVD's of Jim walking you through it- it's also offered on-line- excellent foundation in logic!

I know very little about logic, having never studied it myself. I feel really under confident about trying to teach this subject! 😩 I don't really know what you mean by symbolic vs. linguistic logic. Would any of these companies be adequate by themselves, or would I still need TL1 from MP, say, after doing Intro Logic by Nance to cover the "linguistic" logic? Sorry, I don't even know if I'm expressing my questions logically here! 😃 Could I use CAP by itself? Romans Road by itself? If I started with the BLuedorn books, is there overlap with the CAP products, and I should jump in at a later level? Do these products basically cover the same things just in different ways?

I know very little about logic, having never studied it myself. I feel really under confident about trying to teach this subject! 😩 I don't really know what you mean by symbolic vs. linguistic logic. Would any of these companies be adequate by themselves, or would I still need TL1 from MP, say, after doing Intro Logic by Nance to cover the "linguistic" logic? Sorry, I don't even know if I'm expressing my questions logically here! 😃 Could I use CAP by itself? Romans Road by itself? If I started with the BLuedorn books, is there overlap with the CAP products, and I should jump in at a later level? Do these products basically cover the same things just in different ways?

Amy, after much reading this is what I understand (someone correct if I misrepresent!):

Could I use CAP by itself? Yes; Art of Argument, then Discovery of Deduction, then Argument Builder as an Intro to Rhetoric- though some do AB after AoA); you will miss out on symbolic logic with this route

Romans Road by itself? Yes; though my opinion is you'll leave out too much informal and linguistic logic

If I started with the BLuedorn books, is there overlap with the CAP products, and I should jump in at a later level?

The Bluedorn materials are good for getting the child excited about critical thinking, IMO and, nless yor child is already 14 or 15, shouldn't be skipped

AoA covers similar material, but at a more mature and serious level; so, IMO, if you're starting in high school already, skip to AoA

Do these products basically cover the same things just in different ways?

I hope I helped answer that above

I want my children to have both forms, so my plan is to use these(still figuring out order) :

Also, check out the Table of Contents and/or samples of 'Introductory Logic' by Nance and DoD; they may be similar enough to choose only one-whichever one suits your child's style; I'm going to do that myself

Could I use CAP by itself? Yes; Art of Argument, then Discovery of Deduction, then Argument Builder as an Intro to Rhetoric- though some do AB after AoA); you will miss out on symbolic logic with this route

Romans Road by itself? Yes; though my opinion is you'll leave out too much informal and linguistic logic

If I started with the BLuedorn books, is there overlap with the CAP products, and I should jump in at a later level?

The Bluedorn materials are good for getting the child excited about critical thinking, IMO and, nless yor child is already 14 or 15, shouldn't be skipped

AoA covers similar material, but at a more mature and serious level; so, IMO, if you're starting in high school already, skip to AoA

Do these products basically cover the same things just in different ways?

I hope I helped answer that above

I want my children to have both forms, so my plan is to use these(still figuring out order) :

Also, check out the Table of Contents and/or samples of 'Introductory Logic' by Nance and DoD; they may be similar enough to choose only one-whichever one suits your child's style; I'm going to do that myself

(BUMPING THREAD FROM LAST YEAR!)

Hello, I was wondering what progression you did end up using, and how far along you've gotten down your logic path. What have you used, in what order, and how did you like it?

For 6th, we did both Fallacy Detective and Thinking Toolbox. I can't remember how we paced it. I think one chapter per week made each book about a semester long. Actually, I think he blasted through FD and then TT took a little longer. Anyway, Ds loved them both. Only problem is he is constantly picking out his little sister's "fallacies". Eight year olds use a lot of red herrings, apparently.